Rank & Rate: The Tom Baker Era
- Thread starter Emperor-Tiberius
- Start date
After 20 minutes of random Paris wandering, it didn't deserve any more of my time. I'm not going to sit through a vintage Travel Channel special on Paris to see more of the "Thieves with alien tech try to steal the Mona Lisa" plot. Unless the twist is that all the thieves are The Master in disguise, there is no pay off worth it. Plus, I just know that there is a bunch more random, pointless Paris scenes.
I'd rather rewatch, say, Time and the Rani then try to watch more of The City of Death. At least then I can get some morbid entertainment out of seeing The Rani dressing as Mel and McCoy wearing Colin baker's coat. The City of Death isn't even interesting bad, its boring bad, which is usually worse (although there are some just plain bad serials that are a lot worse, of course).
Right, thats it. Your credibility is officially questioned. I don't know if there is anything that can be said that can match the magnitude of this phrase. Wow!
EDIT: Then again, I should've been tipped off by the Two Doctors>City of Death.
Last edited:
Agree on Genesis of the Daleks - that one's my favorite Doctor Who story, period, but except for the scene where Leela's bad table manners are on display, I found nothing to like about The Talons of Weng-Chiang.
Stomach-turning (I hate bugs, no matter what size they are).
Boring.
Meh. Back to the helpless screaming companion, which is why I really didn't like Romana I.
Agreed for the most part. Ian Marter wrote the novelization of The Sontaran Experiment and expanded it some, making a much more chilling story of it. He was one of the better novelists who adapted the Classic episodes. But I didn't like Terror of the Zygons, and found Underworld pathetic. The Pirate Planet was the first episode I'd ever deliberately tried to watch (had seen a couple of scenes at a convention a few months earlier - the tea scene from Genesis of the Daleks and another from Image of the Fendahl). I nearly turned off the TV because it was just so dumb. But I'd promised a friend to give the show an honest chance and finished watching it. I still don't like that silly story, but thank goodness things picked up in Stones of Blood.
Aside from The Android Invasion (which was "meh" for me), every one of these is on my List of Best Doctor Who Stories Ever.
Again, some of these are among my favorites. The Robots of Death is especially good, since I can actually imagine the society that the miners belong to existing apart from the episode. Some of the guest characters have interesting backgrounds.
But about this matter of not finishing City of Death or Image of the Fendahl and deeming them terrible... even I forced myself to sit through the nuTrek movies right to the end. If you're going to say they're 'terrible' you should base your opinion on the whole story, because as it is, you skipped the main conflict and parts of the story that explain everything.
Wow.
They were not "wandering" randomly, aimlessly, pointlessly, or any other way. They were either walking or running because they had a destination... and surprisingly, these two Time Lords aren't like the Third Doctor who owned a car!
The plot was there, but you were apparently so incensed about their filming in Paris, that you didn't notice the plot.
Would it have been more palatable if they'd been running through the streets of London?
Right, thats it. Your credibility is officially questioned. I don't know if there is anything that can be said that can match the magnitude of this phrase. Wow!
EDIT: Then again, I should've been tipped off by the Two Doctors>City of Death.
The Two Doctors has my two favorite Classic Who Doctors on a fun adventure. Of course I'm going to like it better than a slow, pointless 25 minutes of Tom Baker wandering around Paris. My "credibility" is fine, you just don't agree with me. Which is fine, but my opinion is as valid as yours.
Talons has some problems (most notably the racist character) but as a story its entertaining and is probably one of the best 6 part stories.
I actually quite liked Romana one, I wish she'd been in a better season.
The Deadly Assassin's biggest problem was that its whole premise was stupid. The Time Lords are an advanced species, but they still war with themselves and routinely kill their presidents? The Time Lords were basically made more and more stupid as the show went on, and this was a good example of it. The Sun-Makers was just irritaiting, and one of the few Doctor Who stories to suffer from being too "British". I'm sure if you know British Tax Code, you'll at least be in on the joke. for me, it was just annoying. Kind of like how The Happiness Patrol is kind of pointless to watch if you know nothing about Margret Thatcher.
The Robots of Death is possibly the first Classic Who serial I outright loathed. Pretty much every second found new ways to infuriate me.
I've sat through The Greatest Show in the Galaxy, Time and the Rani, Robots of death and The Invasion of Time (among others). I've done my time sitting and watching atrocious Doctor Who stories. At this point, I'm no longer willing to watch the complete garbage that sometimes pops up in Doctor Who. If one fourth of a story makes me want to travel back through time and slap the writer, I'm not going to waste another second on it.
Wow.
They were not "wandering" randomly, aimlessly, pointlessly, or any other way. They were either walking or running because they had a destination... and surprisingly, these two Time Lords aren't like the Third Doctor who owned a car!
The plot was there, but you were apparently so incensed about their filming in Paris, that you didn't notice the plot.
Would it have been more palatable if they'd been running through the streets of London?
They weren't just running from location to location. They were slowing ambling through locations, and outright filming stuff they would have skipped over in any other story. The Paris walking scenes were long and drawn out. Most episodes would skip ahead to the next location, especially because they weren't being chased. The City of Death episode 1 was 90% walking, and I've never seen a Doctor Who serial (whether the Doctor has a car or not) do that. It was annoying and a bit of a F you to the viewers. The streets of London would have been more "palatable" solely because they wouldn't have felt the need to draw out location shots.
More "wandering."
Wandering means not knowing where you're going, or not having a precise destination. That's not true of this story, which you'd have known if you'd seen all of it. The 20th century Paris scenes had the characters knowing their destinations, and so did the scenes where they time traveled (but you didn't watch those, or at least not most of them).
Why?
Then you must have watched it in slow motion. They were not "slowly ambling." (you should forgive them for walking in the Louvre scenes, since running in a museum is not a good idea)kirk55555 said:They weren't just running from location to location. They were slowing ambling through locations, and outright filming stuff they would have skipped over in any other story. The Paris walking scenes were long and drawn out. Most episodes would skip ahead to the next location, especially because they weren't being chased. The City of Death episode 1 was 90% walking, and I've never seen a Doctor Who serial (whether the Doctor has a car or not) do that. It was annoying and a bit of a F you to the viewers. The streets of London would have been more "palatable" solely because they wouldn't have felt the need to draw out location shots.Wow.
They were not "wandering" randomly, aimlessly, pointlessly, or any other way. They were either walking or running because they had a destination... and surprisingly, these two Time Lords aren't like the Third Doctor who owned a car!
The plot was there, but you were apparently so incensed about their filming in Paris, that you didn't notice the plot.
Would it have been more palatable if they'd been running through the streets of London?
It looks like outdoor scenes just aren't your thing, then. Just zip to one set, recite lines, cut elsewhere, recite some lines, zip to the climax, have some more lines and the big fight, then a minute of the ending and closing credits. Wrap it all up in about 15 minutes.
It was nice to see them in an Earth setting that really was the place they were supposed to be in.
More "wandering."
Wandering means not knowing where you're going, or not having a precise destination. That's not true of this story, which you'd have known if you'd seen all of it. The 20th century Paris scenes had the characters knowing their destinations, and so did the scenes where they time traveled (but you didn't watch those, or at least not most of them).
I'm calling BS on this. The Doctor and Romana wandered a lot, even if they had a destination they took their time getting there. I didn't even know there was time traveling in the episode, but if there was it was probably so they could waste more time wandering around Paris
I can't even really explain it, except to say that every single element of the episode was horrible. From the premise to the writing to the setup, it was incompetent at best, painful at worst.
Well, I've never had that problem in any other Doctor Who story I've eve seenr, so its not a case of me disliking outdoor settings. They completely and obviously stretched the Paris filming out. Absolutely nothing happens for 90% of the first episode of City of Death. They literally walk around Paris, go to a museum, and eat at a diner (where the only plot they see happens). We also get about a minute and a half of the people trying to steal the painting. Besides that, its all location shots of The Doctor and Romana in Paris doing absolutely nothing.
If you had actually watched the story, you'd have seen the time traveling to Leonardo's studio and back to the beginning of life on Earth (the only quibble I have is that none of the characters should have been able to breathe outside in that scene since the atmosphere at that time was very unlike the one we have now).I'm calling BS on this. The Doctor and Romana wandered a lot, even if they had a destination they took their time getting there. I didn't even know there was time traveling in the episode, but if there was it was probably so they could waste more time wandering around ParisMore "wandering."
Wandering means not knowing where you're going, or not having a precise destination. That's not true of this story, which you'd have known if you'd seen all of it. The 20th century Paris scenes had the characters knowing their destinations, and so did the scenes where they time traveled (but you didn't watch those, or at least not most of them).
You're trying to imply that they sauntered everywhere. The fact is that they didn't. Running is not "wandering" or "ambling". And even if they'd decided to do the human thing and grab a taxi, try paying the fare when all you have is a pocketful of jelly babies.
Getting around on foot may not be what you would do, but it's what the Doctor and Romana do. The Third Doctor might have grabbed a car or motorcycle, but motorized transport isn't part of the Fourth Doctor's character.
Did you dislike the setting? Music? Costumes? Makeup? Do the robots give you the creeps?
As I used to say to my grandmother when she'd tell me "nothing happened" during my soap, if "nothing" had really happened, the screen would have been blank.
So what if they walk along a sidewalk, cross the road, go into a museum, and look at the Mona Lisa? Earth is the Doctor's favorite planet, and the Mona Lisa is one of the most famous paintings in history. Romana's question, "Why hasn't she got any eyebrows?" is one of the best lines in any Doctor Who story, since it's a very good question that has undoubtedly occurred to many people who have seen that painting.
And so what if they go to a cafe - at that point it's what any tourist would do, Gallifreyans included. It's nice to see that Gallifreyans do normal stuff like eating and drinking.
What would they have had to do for it to count as "something" to you, anyway?
If nothing else, it prepared for the concept of a person scattered across time like broken glass shards upon the ground, the central idea behind the "impossible girl", Clara.
Also, it has a hilarious "bit" with Monty Python's John Cleese mistaking the TARDIS for a piece of art while "parked" in a museum. Out of nowhere, the Doctor, Romana and Duggin the investigator dash into the police box which dematerializes right in front of Cleese and his female companion. They simply accept the spectacle as an element of "performance art" and are otherwise unphased.
Sincerely,
Bill
Also, it has a hilarious "bit" with Monty Python's John Cleese mistaking the TARDIS for a piece of art while "parked" in a museum. Out of nowhere, the Doctor, Romana and Duggin the investigator dash into the police box which dematerializes right in front of Cleese and his female companion. They simply accept the spectacle as an element of "performance art" and are otherwise unphased.
Sincerely,
Bill
I'm shocked they had time to have The Doctor time travel when there was a few feet of sidewalk in Paris they probably hadn't filmed yet
Again, sitting through the Travel channel special to get to a little bit of plot isn't worth it. I figured that they had to do something sometime, I'm just not willing to sit through any more filler to get to it.It has nothing to do with the characters, its about how Tv shows are written. No TV show shows every step characters take getting from Point A to Point B, because then the episode would be five times as long (assuming it had plot going on). The City of death wants to show every single step Tom baker takes in Paris, especially when nothing is happening except getting from point a to point b, and its boring.
The robots were poorly designed and stupid, the script was uninteresting, the sets bland, the actors bad, etc. Like I said, it just sucked in basically every aspect, to the point where it really ticked me off. It was just very, very bad.
They would actually have to do something. Bantering about the Mona Lisa's eyebrows isn't doing something, and neither is eating. I'm watching Doctor Who for adventure, not to see The Doctor do everyday things for 25 minutes. I want bad guys actually doing something, The Doctor trying to solve problems or at least get caught up in them, some action of any kind, and PLOT. You know, like "The Doctor and Romana get to Paris, and while enjoying the view get attacked" or "While in Paris, The Doctor comes across a strange situation, getting himself and Romana into trouble", or any of a dozen other scenarios where the plot starts and something happens.
The plot should be at least half the run time, and the other scenes should contribute something. Romana can do her "advanced alien fish out of water" thing as much as she wants, as long as something is happening around it. Watching The Doctor and Romana eat and look at art is not good television, yet that's basically all there is to the first episode of The City of Death.
Oh, so it's just Paris you don't like. You don't seem to complain about all the wandering around London that happens in nuWho.I'm shocked they had time to have The Doctor time travel when there was a few feet of sidewalk in Paris they probably hadn't filmed yet
Did we see every second of the trip from the museum to the Count's home? No. There are a lot of steps that weren't shown, and your continual insistence that this show was nothing more than Tom Baker's vacation video is nonsense.
Plus, when you're filming on location, doesn't it make sense to show the location? At least this time it's honestly Paris. Do you have any idea how many American TV shows and movies are filmed in Vancouver? I've only been to Vancouver twice, but even I can spot the places that purport to be some American city but are really Vancouver (and Toronto, to a smaller extent).
The Mona Lisa scene is partly a joke that asks the same question many modern people ask in RL. And it's also partly establishing Romana's character - she's trying to understand just what's so great about this planet the Doctor likes so much. By her standards we're technologically backward, and our aesthetic taste doesn't match hers.
You make it sound as though the first episode was nothing but walking in slow motion around every street in Paris, spending days at the Louvre staring at the Mona Lisa, and sitting for hours at a cafe. That is just so wrong that I have to wonder if you saw some alternate universe version of this story.
That is not true. When they are in London in NuWho, they have a point. At the very least, they aren't silently wandering around the streets for 20 minutes, with a minute or two of eating and museum gazing scenes shoved in. They are going somewhere that will have the plot, or set it up, or something.
Technically, every step isn't shown, you're right. But, that's because they only had 23-25 minutes of episode. In that time, they shove in as much uneventful wandering as they can, but not literally every step. So, what? I obviously didn't mean that an episode that probably took a week to film put every second of footage into a 25 minute episode, just that they tried to show as much pointless, uneventful wandering as they could.
I don't care about the location of a shoot, I care about the story. They could film in front of Buckinham Palace, tell me they're in France and I won't care if there is an interesting story happening.
What else was in the episode? They walked for about 16 minutes, looked at a painting for about a minute, and ate at a cafe for a minute or two, until the plot found them. Then, about 2 minutes with them talking to the villains, or the villains by themselves. So, more than 3/4ths of the episode walking, then some talking that did nothing, then a few minutes near the end setting up the "steal the Mona Lisa" plot for the next 3 episodes. A 7 part 3rd Doctor serial did more than that in the first 10 minutes, and those serials are basically 7 part serials with 4 episodes of story stretched out an extra three episodes.
Spoilers be damned:
To be honest the "steal the Mona Losa" isn't even the plot really. It a means to an end for the plot, which deals with the starting of all life on Earth, an alien who is in I think twelve timelines at once. Coordinating with himself across all time. A scientist that is working on a form of time travel (the money from the theft is paying for that). A plot to make six authentic "fakes" of the Mona Lisa to get seven times the money for the time travel experiments...so the alien can stop himself from being split into 12 persons across all time, and bring his race back from extinction. Do so would inadvertently end all life on Earth.
Kind of a lot of plot there for a travelogue, eh? After episode one is used as the establishing location episode and introduce people episode, the plot happens for the remaining three episodes with a lot less of "wondering in Paris without purpose".
The "at the time" complaints about this episode set was that it was "too funny", for the hardcore fans. They were happy that the show was filmed in Paris. That was not a complaint at that time. They were quite tired of quarries and anywhere at UK.
To be honest the "steal the Mona Losa" isn't even the plot really. It a means to an end for the plot, which deals with the starting of all life on Earth, an alien who is in I think twelve timelines at once. Coordinating with himself across all time. A scientist that is working on a form of time travel (the money from the theft is paying for that). A plot to make six authentic "fakes" of the Mona Lisa to get seven times the money for the time travel experiments...so the alien can stop himself from being split into 12 persons across all time, and bring his race back from extinction. Do so would inadvertently end all life on Earth.
Kind of a lot of plot there for a travelogue, eh? After episode one is used as the establishing location episode and introduce people episode, the plot happens for the remaining three episodes with a lot less of "wondering in Paris without purpose".
The "at the time" complaints about this episode set was that it was "too funny", for the hardcore fans. They were happy that the show was filmed in Paris. That was not a complaint at that time. They were quite tired of quarries and anywhere at UK.
Yeah I wasn't all impressed by the time bubble idea and really the Countess not know the Count is an alien makes no sense. But it is the highest rated story in the history of the show, even though it shares many of the problems the entire season had, still it's a one of the better stories in the show's history.
I'm not saying others can't like it. The plot sounds mediocre, and a bad first episode is the nail in the coffin for the story for me, anyway. I'll be happy to never have to deal with it, or any other post The Pirate Planet 4th Doctor serial (minus the two with Anthony Ainley) again. As far as I'm concerned, The Keeper of Traken is the next 4th Doctor serial after The Androids of Tara for me, although I don't know when I'll get to it.
Dude, you only saw, like, one episode. Thats like seeing the first 20 minutes of a single episode, of a two-parter, and walking away. You can't judge unless you've seen the whole thing. The story is fast-paced, especially for the time being. The plot's lovely, the actors are all having fun, especially the great Julian Glover as Scaroth, probably the best villain on the programme until Davros came back later on and Jek in Caves. And for heaven's sake, they were in frickin' Paris - after drivel like Underworld and Invasion of Time showcased how poor the budget can be for that show, seeing them go on location to another COUNTRY was a welcome change for both the look of the show and production standards. And personally, appreciable, as it shows the Doctor going somewhere else other than frickin' Britain all the time, and it helps that it looks great.
I don't agree with "you can't judge if you haven't seen the whole thing". To use examples from stories I did sit through all the way, Time and the Rani was horrible in its first episode, and stayed that way. For NuWho (and, again, episodes I did watch all the way) Love & Monsters and Fear Her were both horrible even just 20 minutes in. I also hated Human Nature/Family of Blood even faster ( whenever it became apparent that The Doctor wasn't just pretending to be an idiot human, and that it would be the bulk of the story). I don't remember seeing a Doctor Who story that was horrible for the first 1/4th of its runtime, then turned it around.
I'm not saying people can't like whatever stories they want. I'm just saying that hating 1/4th of a stories run time is more than enough time to know you personally hate the story in question.
I'm not saying people can't like whatever stories they want. I'm just saying that hating 1/4th of a stories run time is more than enough time to know you personally hate the story in question.
The problem is, your argument on why the first episode sucks is weak. Especially considering that its based on your perception of it being a slow-paced story about people running around in Paris. Which is, of course, nonsense.
Post-poning the list, once again, due to Kirk's craziness.
Last edited:
Similar threads
